CIT v. H. Holck Larsen

160 ITR 67Supreme Court of India1986#1992 most cited

What is CIT v. H. Holck Larsen authority for?

The determination of whether a transaction involving the sale and purchase of shares (or other assets) constitutes a trading transaction (business income) or an investment (capital gains) is a mixed question of law and fact. Courts must consider cumulative factors, including the assessee's habitual dealing and the intention at the time of the initial acquisition, rather than applying abstract tests.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. H. Holck Larsen · 160 ITR 67 · trading transaction vs investment · shares stock-in-trade · capital gains vs business income · mixed question of law and fact · intention of assessee · cumulative factors · Section 111A · Section 45 · character of transaction · habitual dealing

Also reported as

26 Taxmann 305

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 111ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 144Section 45Section 54BSection 54F

Issues it is cited on

section 111aperiod of holdingshort term capital gainssection 2(14)short term capital gaindate of transfersection 36(1)(iii)long term capital gainslong term capital gainsection 40(a)section 36(1)section 43

Judgments citing CIT v. H. Holck Larsen

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…tion to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any distinction between those shares which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment. 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs H. Holck Larsen (160 ITR 67), the Supreme Court observed: The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact. 7. The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above two…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…tion to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any distinction between those shares which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment. 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs H. Holck Larsen (160 ITR 67), the Supreme Court observed: The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact. 7. The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above two…

M/S. MADURA BIOTECH (P) LTD.,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed partly with consequences to follow as per determination of grounds above

ITA 2593/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2010-11 Madura Biotech (P) Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.146-149, Sector I.I.D.C., Circle-6(1), Sidcul Ranipur, New Delhi. Haridwar. Pan: Aafcm8070L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tanpreet Kohli, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali & Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Drs Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Tanpreet Kohli, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali &
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…transactions of purchase of shares, and thereafter selling it within a few days and most of the time within a month, with a view to earn profit, reflects motive of the assessee as a trader and not an investor. 4.1.4 In the case of CIT v. H Holck Larsen [1986] 160 ITR 67, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under: "The character of a transaction cannot be determined solely on the application of any abstract test or rule and the cumulative factors affecting the transactions have to be seen. Habitual dealing in a particular item is indicative of the assessee's intention of trading. Merely for taking benefit of pro…

ACIT CIRCLE-36(1), NEW DELHI vs. HIMANSHU GARG, NEW DELHI

ITA 819/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Niraj Jain, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 54BSection 54F

…urred expenses for laying roads on filling up, corporation survey and other matters, yet the court held that these steps were no more than enabling the assessee to earn a better price rather than plunging into the waters of trade. 15. In CIT Vs. Hoick Larsen 160 ITR 67 (SC) it was held that the real question is not whether the transaction lacks the element of trading but to see whether the first step of the transaction was not taken as, or in the course of, a trading transaction. Applying the said principle it is to be seen in the facts of the Appellant's case that when the land was originally purchased there is…

DCIT CIRCLE 13(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NANDANBALA COMMERCIALS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assesse is also dismissed

ITA 1134/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nandanbala Commercials Income Tax Circle 13(2)(2) Private Limited Room No. 452, 4 Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sanjay Infraspace Limited) Aayakar Bhavan, 1401-A, Wing One Bkc, M.K. Road, Plot No. C-66, G-Block, Mumbai – 400020 Bkc, Bandra-East Mumbai -400 092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aavcs1575L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: HM Bhatt
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(ii)

…pellant submits that intention at the time of purchase of shares is paramount to decide as to whether the same is assessable under business income head or Capital Gains head. j) The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. H. Holck Larsen [1986] 26 Taxman 305/160 ITR 67, had held when transaction of purchase and sale of shares were to nurse investments and to avoid erosion of capital, surplus arising from the sale of shares is a capital receipt. In Appellant's case there was no such intention to hold units of mutual funds. The Appellant held it only for the purposes of earning profits. k) In DPJ Viniyog P. Ltd. v…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), DELHI vs. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7103/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)

…d. 8 dividend etc. then the profits accruing by change in such investment “by sale o f shares” will yield capital gain and not Revenue receipts. The learned CIT(DR) also referred the decision o f Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs . H. Holck Larsen – 160 ITR 67 (S.C) holding that as to whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transaction or whether these were in the nature of investment is not a question of law but it is a mixed question of law and facts. The learned CIT(DR) referred page No. 18 o f the assessment order to support his submissions that there were lot o f frequency…

DCIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SMT YAMINI KHANDELWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 613/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…res which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment." ITA No. 425 & 613/Kol/2015 Yamini Khandelwal ITA No. 1069 & 1105/Kol/2015 Suraj Khandelwal AY 2010-11 16 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs H. Holck Larsen (160 ITR 67), the Supreme Court observed: "The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact." 7. The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above t…

YAMINI KHANDEL WAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 425/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…res which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment." ITA No. 425 & 613/Kol/2015 Yamini Khandelwal ITA No. 1069 & 1105/Kol/2015 Suraj Khandelwal AY 2010-11 16 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs H. Holck Larsen (160 ITR 67), the Supreme Court observed: "The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact." 7. The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above t…

DCIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SURAJ KHANDEL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1105/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…res which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment." ITA No. 425 & 613/Kol/2015 Yamini Khandelwal ITA No. 1069 & 1105/Kol/2015 Suraj Khandelwal AY 2010-11 16 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs H. Holck Larsen (160 ITR 67), the Supreme Court observed: "The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact." 7. The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above t…

SURAJ KHANDELWAL,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1069/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…res which are its stock-in-trade and those which are held by way of investment." ITA No. 425 & 613/Kol/2015 Yamini Khandelwal ITA No. 1069 & 1105/Kol/2015 Suraj Khandelwal AY 2010-11 16 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs H. Holck Larsen (160 ITR 67), the Supreme Court observed: "The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact." 7. The principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above t…

SUPRERIOR FINANCIAL CONSULTANCY SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7501/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble&

For Appellant: Shri V.G. Ginde &For Respondent: Shri Hoshang Boman Irani
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 43(1)(ii)

…ht to have been taxed as 16 ITA.No. 3113 & 3355/Mum/2015 (A.Y. 2006-07) Superior Financial Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., business profits in consonance with the principle enumerated in the decision of Supreme Court in the case of H. Holck Larsen reported in 160 ITR 67?” 4. “Without prejudice to above, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the CIT (A) is justified in accepting the cost of acquisition as original cost of purchase, ignoring that part of the cast of purchase had been claimed as loss and so allowed to assessee at the time of conversion of stock-in-trade to investment,…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1893/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudharydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv0132B Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…way of dividend etc. then the profits accruing by change in such investment “by sale of shares” will yield capital gain and not Revenue receipts. The learned CIT(DR) also referred the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. H. Holck Larsen – 160 ITR 67 (S.C) holding that as to whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transaction or whether these were in the nature of investment is not a question of law but it is a mixed question of law and facts. The learned CIT(DR) referred page No. 18 of the assessment order to support his submissions that there were lot of frequency an…

BUNKIM FINANCE & INVESTMENTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 10(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 6166/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 208Section 73

…case of CIT Vs Prabhu Dayal 82 ITR 804 that question as to whether receipt is a capital receipt of income, has to be judged from the facts of each case and question of law can be drawn such facts. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. H. Holck Larsen 160 ITR 67 also held that whether transaction of sale and purchase of share is a trading transaction or in the nature of investment, is a mixed question of law and facts. Therefore, to decide the question as to whether assessee has to be treated as investor in share or a trader or shares is to be considered, considering totalities of all facts. In view there…

SHRI HARISHBHAI KESHAVLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1180/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1180/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2006-2007

Section 250

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ A ’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1180/AHD/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2006-2007 Harishbhai Keshavlal Patel, D.C.I.T, Patel 27-B, Sudarshan Vs. Circle-7, Society, Ahmedabad. Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380013. PAN: ABXPP2730L (Applicant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Shri Vivek Chavda, A.R : Revenue by Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/05/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 29/05/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED…

ADIT, NEW DELHI vs. MS. ASHA KUMAR AGGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1340/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Adit, Vs. Ms. Asha Kumar Aggarwal, Circle-1(1) (Intl. Taxation), E-335, East Of Kailash, New New Delhi Delhi Pan :Adcpa4605J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri C.P. Singh, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri R.S. Ahuja, Ca

Section 143(2)

…investment in her books and valued at cost. It was also contended that the intention of the assessee should be read from its conduct and not on the basis of assumptions. The appellant placed reliance on the following decisions: • H Hoick Larsen v. CIT (1972) 160 ITR 67 (Bom) 3 • AAR (288 ITR 641) • CIT v. Gopal Purohit-ITA No. 1121/09 dated 6.01.2010 • J.M. Stock Broking v JCIT )ITAT Mumbai) • DC IT v SMK Shares and Stock Broking • Shri Janak S. Rangwalla v ACIT ITA No. 1163/Mum/2004 • Fidelity Northstar Fund • CIT v PNB Finance Ltd. 2.1 The assessee in support of the above claim relied on the decisions of the…

SHRI ASHOKKUMAR KHIMRAJ,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1247/AHD/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1247/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Shri Ashokkumar Khimraj Ito, बनाम/ Prop. Ridhi Siddhi Ward – 3(1), Vs. Enterprises, 21, Shitalkunj Ahmedabad. Society, Rambaug Road, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afdpk 6404 N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Parin Shah, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr. D.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By:

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: 01/11/2018

…produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any distinction between those shares which are its stock-in- trade and those which are held by way of investment." 6. In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay v. H. Holck Larsen [1986] 160 ITR 67, the Supreme Court observed : "The High Court, in our opinion, made a mistake in observing whether transactions of sale and purchase of shares were trading transactions or Ashokkumar Khimraj vs. ITO A.Y. 2006-07 whether these were in the nature of investment was a question of law. This was a mixed question of law and fact." 7. The principles laid…

ASST. CIT, CIRCLE-6, PUNE vs. SAKAL PAPERS LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 926/PUN/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ashok KotharyFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 80I

…r observed that the assessee had purchased the shares with an intention A.Y.2006-07 to keep them as stock in trade and not as investments. Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. H. Holck Larsen, reported as 160 ITR 67, the Assessing Officer hold that the act of the assessee in purchasing shares showed that he intended to hold shares as stock-in-trade only. The Assessing Officer further observed that the various judgements relied upon by the assessee were not applicable in the case of the assessee as they did not deal with the issue in the present case i.e. w…

DIVYA SHAKTI TRADING SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5029/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2008-09 Dy.Cit Vs. M/S Divya Shakti Trading Services Ltd. Circle 10(1) (Now M/S Indiabulls Advisory Services Ltd.) New Delhi F 60, 2Nd Floor, Malhotra Building Cannaught Place New Delhi Pan: Aaccd4953E A.Y. 2008-09 M/S Divya Shakti Trading Services Dy.Cit Ltd. Vs. Circle 10(1) (Now M/S Indiabulls Advisory New Delhi Services Ltd.) New Delhi Pan: Aaccd4953E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH “B” : NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2008-09 Dy.CIT vs. M/s Divya Shakti Trading Services Ltd. Circle 10(1) (Now M/s Indiabulls Advisory Services Ltd.) New Delhi F 60, 2nd floor, Malhotra building Cannaught Place New Delhi PAN: AACCD4953E A.Y. 2008-09 M/s Divya Shakti Trading Services Dy.CIT Ltd. vs. Circle 10(1) (Now M/s Indiabulls Advisory New Delhi Services Ltd.) New Delhi PAN: AACCD4953E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Gautam Jain, Sh. Piyush Kr. Kamal, Advs & Sh.Lalit Mohan,…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MOHINDER PURI, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.2310/Del

ITA 2310/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 2(13)Section 28Section 54F

…contrary if the principles laid down are applied the case supports assessee’s contention. 38 ITA.Nos.2309 & 2310/Del./2011 Shri Arjun Puri And Shri Mohinder Puri, New Delhi. 10. Before closing we would like to refer to the judgment in CIT Vs Hoick Larsen 160 ITR 67 (SC). In this judgment also the judgment of Naidu’s case was referred to. It was held that the real question is not whether the transaction lacks the element of trading but to see whether the first step of the transaction was not taken as, or in the course of, a trading transaction. Applying the said principle it may kindly be appreciated that w…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. ARJUN PURI, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.2310/Del

ITA 2309/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 2(13)Section 28Section 54F

…contrary if the principles laid down are applied the case supports assessee’s contention. 38 ITA.Nos.2309 & 2310/Del./2011 Shri Arjun Puri And Shri Mohinder Puri, New Delhi. 10. Before closing we would like to refer to the judgment in CIT Vs Hoick Larsen 160 ITR 67 (SC). In this judgment also the judgment of Naidu’s case was referred to. It was held that the real question is not whether the transaction lacks the element of trading but to see whether the first step of the transaction was not taken as, or in the course of, a trading transaction. Applying the said principle it may kindly be appreciated that w…

Showing 1–20 of 58 · Page 1 of 3